Possible some ship ideas if Naval warfare will be added

This is just a thread in support of this one:
https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/yes-more-sea-battle.192165/

I want to throw in some possible ideas for types of naval vessels and what they can do.

Starters, the Super Battleships, the naval version of the MBT's:

These will be POWERFUL, pretty close to immune to everything except another Battleship, a good bombing, or a few well placed torpedoes. I'm pretty sure there's a story with the top of a ship coming off after getting shot by one of these Battleships...somewhere.

These would have incredible armor, I think the Yamato has a 400mm thick hull. So tank shells aren't going to be a threat.
Obviously, these would be slower and less maneuverable than others.

Pros
-Pretty close to immune against everything not specifically built to damage it. Cannons do little, Torpedoes need to hit VERY well to sink these
-Unmatched firepower, pretty sure if all the cannons fired and the shots hit your ship, it's gonna capsize
-Incredible AA platform, although aircraft can be its worst enemy, it's built to keep that problem away
-Can be, if added...a very scary form of artillery, raining MASSIVE shells down on the enemy, and they will never be able to hit back unless they get naval support

Cons
-Slow, faster than a submarine, even if the Sub is surfaced, but slower than other ships
-Very poor at turning, the incredible weight just makes turning very difficult
-Massive, this thing will be very difficult to miss
-Very weak against aircraft if hit on the top, although its AA capabilities are incredible, if a plane makes it, and bombs the top, it's going to cause more than serious problems
-Very loud engine, Submarines will have no problem finding these

Japanese Yamato.


The rest of these I'll take screenshots with from a game I play, so I you can get a colored, and close up view of the ships.

The British King George V


The American North Carolina


The German Bismarck


The Italian Littorio


Then the Cruisers that can basically be the naval versions of lightnings. These are fairly fast, medium sized, pack a decent punch.

Pros
-Packs a lot of firepower for such a smaller ship
-Not too difficult to get
-Fairly fast
-Great at supporting the fleet

Cons
-Easy to take out, Battleships will happily split these in half, and a couple well placed shots from Torpedoes will sink it
-Little anti-air capabilities
-Much more vulnerable to aircraft bombing
-Loud engine, more difficult to spot than a battleship, but easier than other vessels


The German Admiral Hipper Cruiser


The American Northampton Cruiser


The British Kent Cruiser


Now Carriers, in this game, the faster you can get troops spawned and fighting, the better your chances of victory, logistics is also important, and without supplies, the war effort would be pointless. So to be the Sunderer version, I think Aircraft carriers are the best choice. They can be mobile spawn points for troops, allow aircraft to resupply, and possibly even spawn, and/or be carried.

Probably completely and utterly useless if it's up against anything armed, unless it's protected and far away, behind a fleet of ships and aircraft.

Pros
-Resupply, carry, and deploy aircraft
-Resupply and repair Ships
-Mobile troop spawner
-Possibly even spawn small boats, like the Elco
-Almost unstoppable and unkillable if it keeps its distance, and uses aircraft and other ships to its advantage

Cons
-Horrible if attacked by really anything, it deter aircraft, but will be absolutely useless if pursued by any ship, Submarines will be the a Carriers worst nightmare
-Large, these are very all, and very long. They'll be easy to hit
-Very loud, not just the engine, but from everything else going on in and on the carrier. Submarines will find these easily

The American Bogue Carrier


The British Glorious Carrier


Next are the Destroyers, which can take the place of Harassers on the sea, very quick, very light, not going to survive against a Battleship, but maybe we can make these great at fighting submarines, keeping the fleet safe from subs, and even pursuing enemy ships to take out those lone wolves.

Pros
-Very fast
-Very agile
-Best Submarine hunters
-Great at beating up lone ships, and chasing any runners
-Very small
-Quiet, Submarines will have difficulties finding these at longer ranges

Cons
-Piss Poor armor, 1 or 2 Torpedoes, or a few hits from ships will end the ship
-Poor firepower, will not do well at all against Cruisers and Battleships.
-Little to no AA capability

The American Clemson


The British A Class


The German Type 34


Now obviously we need the super light boats, like a naval version of the Flash.

Pros
-Great for quick and cheap transportation
-Fastest naval vessels
-Great for hit and runs to annoy and/or distract the enemy
-Great for scouting
-Very quiet, submarines will have serious problems hearing the engines and even worse, finding them

Cons
-Pretty much no ability to survive direct hits
-No AA capability
-Little to no armor
-Little firepower, if Torpedoes are given, that would be its only way to sting ships

A torpedoe armed boat basically, the Elco


And now, we need a true ship killer. Submarines. These will play a huge part, just like Liberators used to, in keeping the big machines in check. Battleships, Cruisers, Carriers, etc will have very serious problems dealing with Submarines, much like we used to with Liberators.

Undetectable by radar unless it surfaces, if water graphics are improved if naval warfare is added, the they can be seen if they're too close to the surface, the periscope can be seen if it's out of the water. And it can be detected by sonar if it's underwater when it's going to fast, or some other way we can have.

They can't be hit so easily by cannons, depth charges are used to damage, and destroy these.

Obviously underwater, they go much slower than on the surface, and are limited to only torpedoes, if any other weapon is added to it.

Can easily destroy any ship, any. Just like Liberators used to be the thing that keeps the population of tanks and Sunderers in check, the Submarine will do the same to ships.

Torpedoes can be used to destroy a submarine, possibly by the Torpedoe boat above, or by another Submarine

Cannons can VERY quickly end the hunt of a Submarine, if they hit. If the Submarine is on the surface, a cannon can very easily and quickly sink or severely damage the Submarine, if it's underwater, but right under the surface, then maybe with less damage, if it's deep underwater, then it's safe, but by then, I don't think shooting it will be your biggest concern

Pros
-If deep underwater, invisible to the enemy radar, and to their eyes.
-Can go an entire battle without ever being the victim of enemy firepower
-Great infiltrator and Hunter
-Potentially immune to aircraft if it submerges in time
-The unmatched ship killer
-Very difficult to find with a smart captain.

Cons
-Very easy to destroy if surfaced.
-If possible, can only Submerge with a certain amount of damage. So if it's at 30% hp, it will not submerge.
-Useless AA abilities
-Very vulnerable to Torpedoes, if hit by one while submerged, it's almost guranteed to sink
-Poor at following moving targets, it's slower than every ship. Requiring it to position itself to sink a ship
-Relies very heavily on sonar to be stealthy, and find targets. If the targets aren't running at full speed, the Submarine will have problems

Luckily, Silent Hunter has plenty of submarines for me to take pictures of, so here are some.

German Type IX-D2


The German Type XVIII Walther


The American Balao


The American S-42


And the American Porpoise


My hope is that if naval warfare is ever considered, that some of these ideas will come to mind.

Obviously I didn't base much of this on reality, because it's a game, but I tried to think of ways to make it fair.

I don't think these should all be NS vehicles. Maybe some, but I think ES ships are a far better idea.

Hope some of you agree with these ideas, maybe something to add? I certainly hope naval warfare is added.

10/10 for the effort.

But yeah we might or might not see this in the game in about 10 years.

I don't think I'd be employing someone that can't add several models in that long XD

I doubt PS-2 will even be the main game by then, in ten years, I think we'll have PS-3 and maybe even 4 if we're talking 10 years.

Why don't you allow players to infiltrate it, place mines/C4 on critical places (ammo storage) inside for damage, ADDITIONALLY (not alternatively) allow them to overload generators to damage the ship and stop certain functions (slower reload, speed, less armor/repairs etc).

Because you're not going to succeed with getting a living soldier on to one of those ships, guaranteed.

Plus c4 is ruining the game as it is, it's really stupid, why would you want that to apply to naval warfare?

Mines can work too, inexpensive, and just as deadly when the crew isn't paying attention.

Even if we allowed soldiers to c4 parts of ships, it's going to be one of the most incredibly hard tasks I can think of, especially when pretty much all your enemies are active and watching. You're on the open seas, a infiltration attempt will be very easy to spot, and to eliminate. A submarine however, can do that for everyone.

I mean I guess it can work, but it's just another ridiculous addition because you're always get people who should've lost, but instead can turn it around by bum rushing the ship to disable it from inside, and no amount of skill or tactics were put in.

I prefer Submarines and Torpedoes from other ships being the killer instead, it requires skill from the attacker, and the defender can actually fight it with proper skill and quick thinking.

I strongly, STRONGLY disagree. C4 is one of the best things they gave to infantry. It costs resources to use even if you fail and the frail infantry can be shot down before they reach it. There is a high risk/reward ratio in there that forces tanks to get backup from friendlies or keep moving (which is actually pretty easy enough).
I wasn't thinking of allowing infantry to C4 the hull, that would just damage it a little. I was thinking getting on the ship, fighting their way through some chambers and past some defenses (any battleship would have several anti-infantry cannons as well). It would also create better roles on the sea's. Instead of 'battleship battleship battleship SUBMARIIIIIIINES!' because any other ship looks a lot more useless at this point infiltration would give the sea battles far more versatility.
It's the same with tanks not being able to capture a point on most outposts. You want a versatile, differentiated battle where everything is useful. Infantry needs to be able to play it's part in such battles, if possible tanks would play a role too, at least in shore/naval battles.
With infiltration the transport boats become important. They are the danger that the battleships have trouble thwarting. Battleships are armed to destroy the cruisers, destroyers and aircraft carriers but should have trouble taking out the nimble, small transports. That's where the cruisers and destroyers come in. Destroyers are small and fast enough with weapons low enough to easily hit transports, where Battleships simply have too much elevation to hit transports effectively. Cruisers would defend battleships from enemy destroyers that got so close to the large battleship that it can't aim low enough to hit them. This way every ship plays it's part, with the Aircraftcarrier as the spawn/repair/support role ship.

The Submarine, I don't really agree with your anology. Liberators were never the 'things to keep big machines in check'. They were simply overpowered, every weapon great against infantry, tanks and still effective against air these were simply overpowered.
The stats you then give to the submarine are then a lot more balanced.
I would like to add a few ships though:
Frigate. a small craft armed with one frontal canon and a back that has a variable support loadout. It can arm itself with a small flight-deck for resupplying and repairing ESF that land on it. It can switch it out with a depth charge to hunt down submarines (requiring more use of Cruisers and destroyers to take out Frigates), a mining suite to lay down and clear enemy mines (best against small craft) or a repair suite to repair smaller vessels. It has room to equip either a Sonar to scan for subs, mines and other boats or an air-radar that tracks enemy aircraft. Additionally, it could sport a radar jammer that hides signatures of nearby ships. This way a lone Frigate could be there hunting down Submarines, creating a minefield, providing airsupport... or hiding several Subs heading to a large battlegroup.

From your description, only the Battleship has any notable AA capabilities. I would personally allow at least cruisers to equip AA, but best would be to allow every ship to swap out some cannons for AA. This so you can create dedicated AA ships to clear the skies.

I would also change the health of some ships, 'cons of a cruiser: easy to take out', it's the next biggest non-support ship in the fleet! I understand that you partially want to recreate a silent hunter idea, but tanks are capable of receiving multiple rockets or tank shells before they die. A destroyer should be able to withstand multiple hits as well, it's a ship that already carries more firepower than a MBT! In keeping with that way of battle in Planetside 2, all ships should be able to endure multiple hits. Especially when you take into account the fact that almost every ship has multiple multi-barreled cannons ready to sink you.

It's not that I don't like your idea's, on the contrary, I just think they can improve.

Yours sincerely,
Demigan.

the problem with implicating sea battles is that there arent really that many bases along the coast line plus the fact that being in the coast line is off limits anyway. they would have to put in a lot of work just to extend the maps and borders out to the sea as well as puting something out there worth fighting for/in. not to mention the problem of actually designing ships, which at the moment SOE is having some malasses heels on the subject of pushing the Valkyrie out. so that gives you a general idea of how long it takes just to make ONE vehicle let alone a couple for variety on the seas.

You have some good ideas here, but there are some fundamental problems with naval warfare in PS2 which may be unsolvable.

First of all, short of making every continent into archipelagos, there's no way to get the navy involved in the fight for every base. That's going to force ship-focused players to constantly cluster around a few bases, and tons of people are going to hate getting farmed to hell and back by an unassailable horde of ships.

Second, a lot of infantry players and tankers already dislike the fact that air units can attack them when they can't effectively fight back (I've got no problem with the air game, personally, but plenty of people do). The naval game would be ten times worse in this regard. Against air units, at least you can shoot a few lock-on rockets as a heavy, or go burster MAX and stay within a few steps of the spawn room. But individuals really can't do anything against a ship, not even suicidal c-4 runs.

Third, I have to imagine that nearly all naval fights would be identical. There's no terrain to speak of, base design doesn't matter, and the goal is always to take out the enemy ships and air units, then farm infantry and armor until the fight is over. Yes, you could theoretically do an amphibious assault, but realistically, it will be simpler and more efficient to just park a sunderer nearby, as usual. The only interesting part is ship-to-ship combat, which reinforces the fact that the sailors are playing a totally different game from everyone else.

If you play on Emerald and fight the VS you see can see every hour why it's destroying the game. For pretty much a week now, it's been endless suicide ramming by c4 covered flashes. It should be an anti-infantry weapon, not anti-vehicle.

As for it being Battleship and Submarines, no. The thing about naval warfare is that even though the Battleship is very powerful, the biggest problem is always hitting your target kilometers away. Once you fire, the potential victim can spot the flash of light from the guns firing and reposition.

Now of course if the weaker ships get up close, then the Battleship is guaranteed to win. I doubt we should allow the whole Pirates of the Caribbean slug it out event where they broadside each other, going in a circle.

As for Submarines and Liberators. I think different. When I played on Mattherson pre-nerf, the Liberators kept the tank population lower as they flew over and sent everything at the convoys, or besieging armies. It forced people to go AA as well. Now, after the nerf, and when we get merged with Waterson into Emerald, THEY'RE EVERYWHERE. There ALWAYS needs to be vehicles made with the potential capability of being very deadly at one thing, the Liberators were the tank busters, and it was good. And now if naval warfare is added, we need something to be like the Liberator at sea, and possibly even require more or the same level of skill and concentration to use.

There apparently is A LOT of both disastrous, and terrifying accidents with subs in history. Collisions, groundings, the most terrifying I think would be the USS Thresher. Things like that.

And yes, Battleships have the best AA capabilities. I just looked up what ships might've been the most effective, and apparently light cruisers were really, really deadly against aircraft.

You have to understand that ships are basically like a small floating town of pain and metal. They're designed to be able to take on as much as possible, because they can. The bigger the ship, the more it has. That's why as you see with the Yamato, it has an insane amount of anti-air guns.

I didn't mention resource costs, but obviously SOE would be able to handle that.

We can't treat naval warfare like we do with ground warfare in this game, it's a very different kind of warfare.

Battleship for terrans:


For NC:


For vanus:


Supreme commander FTW!

Yes please - a little Supreme Commander would really fit well into a game thats advertised by its scale like Planetside2.
Imagine bases giving your faction resources and after you get 10k a Tier4 Unit gets built for the whole faction that takes 30 minutes to complete.

Im salivating at the thought of a VS CZAR or a TR Fatboy or a NC Soulripper laying waste to the battlefield.

Sadly it won't ever happen. Aside from the technical aspects (and imagine driving a fatboy through indars canyons XD) most people would just leave instead of fighting a REAL superweapon.

Back on topic: Why not make ships destructible, swimming, mobile bases?

Carriers and Battleships for example could have 2 spawnpoints complete with SCU, a fire control room, an engine room, a munitions deck, in case of a carrier a flight deck.... all vulnerable targets if some guys manage to enter the ship on a small and fast attack craft.
I really like the idea of naval battles, but to do it effectively you should need quite some teamwork. Like on a real ship.
Hmm maybe also do something like outfit ships? With decal and everything?
Might be interesting in addition to the battle isles....

But seriously, all that stuff is a lot of work - as great as the idea is, it won't happen. At least not anytime soon.

I agree, ships should not be considered vehicles but more mobile bases. As for their implementation, our greatgrandchildren should be able to name them after us, with a bit of luck.
Still in the topic but a little aside: War thunder wants to implement warships in the future, probably before our greatgrandchildren though, but no release date yet.

OP from what game are these pictures from? Looks fun

The ships, Silent Hunter 5

The Submarine and Elco, Silent Hunter 4

We are at odds, but I don't think we can work it out.

C4:
Mines are meant against infantry, C4 is to be used against heavy targets such as tanks and MAXes. If it becomes an infantry only
C4 on top of Flashes is an expensive method, it costs 100 vehicle resources and 200 infantry resources, but I do not agree with such tactics. It's too powerful compared to having to approach. I personally have motion radar equipped on my Lightning and often provide infantry cover, which makes it near impossible for anyone to get to them.
I understand that on some servers people somehow manage to abuse it, but I still think that infiltration should be a major option. It would change the game from a purely firepower-based fight to a more complex one.
C4 should in no means be a way to insta-destroy any of these incredible machines. Infiltration would be to either kill off certain people that you can reach (the bridge perhaps), deal some internal damage or slow down processes (generators overloaded to slow down ship speed, steering, reload etc).I also like the idea someone gave of adding capture points on ships that can be taken, making everything moving bases that can be fought over just as much as destroyed. Imagine a group of ships standing against eachother, their value when captured so great that there's just one big battle raging inside with occasionally someone taking control of a turret to destroy approaching enemy's.
You also compain about too many tanks everywhere after the Liberator nerf. I have yet to see many more on Indar and Hossin (fought mostly on Hossin so far). C4 is a good tankmass repellant. Having places where tanks need to disembark (Biodomes) also helps against this, possibly an important feature that can be used against ship-zergs as well.

Battleships should be strong, powerful. But I think that a Battleship should be much more vulnerable at close range, otherwise, who would take any other ship than the big ship-splitter with plenty of anti-air and long-range anti-everything cannons? The only other viable option would be to take Submarines... which limits the entire sea-battle to two shiptypes.
Making Battleships vulnerable at close ranges (not undefendable, but vulnerable) makes other ships a viable option. A Destroyer rush could be useful as the Battleship can annihilate several, but the Destroyers that get close can than deal great damage and Sink it eventually if the Crew on the Battleship doesn't get help. This would make friendly Cruisers and Destroyers useful. It would also open up more tactics with hiding ships behind reefs and the like.

Buying ships could be a joint efford. Multiple people can cueue for a ship which they can pilot together (gunners, captain, mechanics/defenders/boarders) after which resources are deducted from each one (if they agree and can pay up). Larger ships would cost more and require more people to be piloted. I would suggest that you can spawn on a ship you bought should you get killed during an infiltration.
Other options would be to spawn ships in large, closed off hangars. When enough people show up to form a skeleton crew you can take a ship and pilot it. Spawning takes some time and only a maximum of ships is available. This does limit tactics and free will.
Another option is to allow people to put gained resources into one ship, once they have gathered enough resources they can spawn it and pilot it, but after they chose one they can't gather resources for another one. Small ships can be bought with one 750 resources, bigger ones need either a joint efford by pooling your resources or gathering enough on your onw. Someone can offer his resources to your project. Accessing a terminal shows projects, resources gathered and people that are standing ready to pilot it in case they have gone off to do battle)

A new continent could benefit the sea-game. Aside from a few lakes and a large sea-part you can have tons of islands, with deep rivers, shallow water (better for small craft), bridges and canals to fight in and over. Everything should be useful, tanks, aircraft, infantry, small boats and the bigs ones just as much. You can fight over naval yards, water fortresses (with walls, spawnpoints for miscelangelous vehicles/boats/aircraft and some turrets), important bridges, Domes in the water, Techplants farther inland (meaning you need a beach-assault and shore bombardments) etc. The possibilities are numerous.
Having all this combined would allow tanks to do battle with ships without being shore-bombardment cannon fodder. They could drive up to a deep river as a ship is passing by and deal damage. Infantry could jump on board when ships are passing bridges or large ridges. Having transports carry both tanks and infantry could allow for a real beach-assault, especially if there's enough defenses to defend against shore-bombardments but not enough to nullify their effects.

Having a submarine environment would help as well. So Subs that need to avoid the ground (small damage and reveals location due to sound) and could potentially do battle under water (there is one recorded battle in human history where submarines actually fought underwater that I know off). It would also create a larger tactical game in hiding your Sub and looking for it if there are underwater tunnels that connect lakes and places not normally connected above water.

Yours sincerely,
Demigan.

Trust me, c4 will always be a bad idea. You will always, ALWAYS get people who just dash to get in and drop c4, they will never attempt to fight, c4 just turns what rightfully should've been the defeat of the c4 wielder, into a victory.

As for the whole Battleship thing again, once again, you're thinking about it too much like ground combat. Sure Battleships were almost always escorted by Cruisers and such, but they were able to fight without them. The thing about those ships is that you get a behemoth, that costs you a lot.

The difference between naval and ground warfare is obvious. When we see things in ground warfare, they work for different things, some sit in hills and break anything that comes by, but can't exchange bullets without being destroyed, some sacrifice all speed and mobility for unbreakable armor, such as the Maus. Usually because they're restricted to weight, size, etc.

A ship, follows different rules. If it's strong and well built, it can be a floating army. They can go very long distances compared to their smaller ground based vehicles, they pretty much can stack everything on it with the right design to keep the weight afloat, and the ocean is as clear as can be of obstacles.

So obviously, with that difference, ships tend to have everything stacked on it as they get bigger.

The obvious issue with a battleship is its large guns mean the guns turn slow, so yes, a fast ship can be very annoying, the height of the ship makes gun depression an issue, so low targets will be hard to hit, the bullets are heavy and huge too, so reloading will be an issue, and the 50+ tons of weight means the ship will be piss poor at turning.

Think about it like whaling basically, the pack of light ships gang on the big guy and pick at him until it sinks. That's why they're always escorted.

But if we're talking about slugging it out, nothing will win against a battleship, except another battleship. Unless of course you get a lucky shot, but I think there was only one recorded case where a ship hit I think the engines or fuel tanks and blew the back of the battleship apart, one shot kill.

As for Battleships being weaker at close range, maybe if something is right next to it, but getting there? Good luck, a fight between ships usually means the winner is however spots the flash from the guns and moves away fastest while putting the most bullets in the other ship. That will arguably be one of the hardest things for a Battleship crew in the game, because not only will they have no automated system, or things to guide their aim besides perhaps markings on the scope, they also have to suffer the slow reloading. And as you get to close range combat, that's where the torpedo boat, can really kick in. Small, very low to the water, fast and turns harder than the Battleship's cannons can move.

When it comes to buying ships. I honestly think individuals should be able to have their own, at an extreme cost. Because the problem with a group, is getting a group, deciding on what to get, and even worse, if you have a stubborn leader.

I prefer it that I buy my own vessel, and have people spawn in, if they want, or find random people.

Especially when it comes times where few people are on, you're effectively, and obviously not intentionally punishing people who just don't have the luxury of playing at busy times like most of us can. Where as if they can have their own, they can pick up a crew, or have maybe AI take over until people fill in those seats.

Another thing about Naval warfare is we could help liberate the game from the really boring warpgate and spawning system. If the game moves towards the idea of no more spawn hopping, where instead troops have to get to an area, we can have naval vessels be the way to other continents.

As for Sub vs Sub. I have no idea how it'd work, I assume they would use the hydrophone, and fire at the sound, and hope they hit something.

Subs often have problems with grounding, where they scrap the ground and even get stuck. Or hit things, HARD

I pretty sure if naval warfare is added, having a populated ship won't be a problem, I think most people love destroying big machines

Naval warfare has been suggested since beta. SOE's answer is always "That would be cool, someday in the 10 year plan".

I do not know if the game will last long enough to get to this point of development. Think about how development of game related things not tied to SC sales has slowed. Incomplete Hossin is the best example I can offer.

I don't really see the problem with this, I think you mean someone throws C4 to suicide and kill someone else? If you can force someone to do that, it's their loss of infantry points. Running around and throwing down mines is more cost/effective than suicidebombing with C4.
Also, in the future (before this is ever implemented) there will be a new resource system where vehicles, aircraft and infantry stuff all draws from the same pool, and you do not have a stash of C4, grenades and whatnot anymore. Everything you have is what you have at THAT moment. So getting C4 might very well be a one-time thing you need to do every time again, losing them when you die. It would make C4 runs much more perlious as killing someone before he detonates C4 is now much easier, he loses it even if you kill him BEFORE he drops it! isn't that enough cons aside from it costing 100 resources already?

Now we are talking. All I'm asking for is openings that allow a number of ships that equal the cost of the Battleship to be on par with it. Either by infiltration or to become even better if they pull of a risky tactic (losing the risk means Battleship annihilates you). A battleship should have weaknesses, and your slower turnrate and reload give just the edge that I essentially already mentioned. At long range the Battleship will simply exterminate other ships, it doesn't need the turnrate and it's DPS as well as it's armor allow it to crush them. But if they manage to get close, they can make themselves hard to hit.
Low ships mean the Battleship can only hit the top, such as the bridge and radar dishes sticking out, combined with slow turret turnrates this makes for enough disadvantage. A Destroyer/cruiser needs to keep moving, trying to hit weakspots and getting close enough for people to board. If he stops too long, bye bye Destroyer/Cruiser.
I think all ships could benefit from having alternative weakspots than ground vehicles. The sides need the most armor, the front needs great armor as well. The back still needs a lot of armor. But some places are simply weaker, the Bridge for instance is a good place to hit ships, regardless of how armored it actually is. Hitting the windows could constitute for increased damage, hittting anywhere else results in normal damage.

I think this was the Yamataho, In it's first battle it unexpectedly exploded by a lucky hit, although they could only speculate what happened (A direct armory hit as I recall).

Sounds good.

I mentioned a series of islands with bases on them, but your idea might be even better. You capture a warpgate and instead of the battle-island you have now, you can buy a ship. There is a range of islands and perhaps a few rivers and shallow waters. There is one massive aircraft carrier that functions as the base of operations and can be piloted anywhere. All ships are spawned from this mega-carrier, including other aircraft carriers. The goal would be to destroy the other carrier. There are no spawnpoints but on other ships and perhaps a few waterbases on some islands or passages.
On one hand you end up with a hide-and-seek game where ground units are mostly used as scouts to see what's on the other side of an island you can't look passed (there's tree's, jagged cliffs, an abandoned derilict tech plant or whatever in the way). Aircraft play a great role in scouting and attacking smaller ships, or boarding enemy craft (yes, I really think boarding is an important feature that should be added).
All boats up from a Destroyer have one or more capture points. Hold all points long enough and you capture the ship (since your own spawnpoint is likely getting shot at by the ship you are taking over and your enemy can spawn there as well this won't be an easy feat). There are also weakspots such as an SCU to overload and (I really think it's necessary in straight-out slugfests) ways to damage the ship from the inside with explosives or hacking.

Now you have multiple choices in how to approach the game. If your team is the big guy with the most battleships it's best to place your mega-carrier in the open sea. You can easily blow up everything that might come your way long before they have a real chance of doing something to you.
If you are the team that doesn't have it all you are resigned to more sneaky tactics. Either you gather a small force on another sea capable of dealing with whatever comes your way, or you hide your Mega-carrier between some islands and inlets while you use Subs and small ships to harrass and perhaps destroy/capture any ship foolish enough to try and find you.

I think some beach-ships should be available as well. Capable of getting close enough to the beach to deploy, after which you can buy vehicles or spawn infantry there. This isn't always necessary, but I think the capability to have inland(or in-island) bases where aircraft can resupply and infantry/tanks can stage assaults to ships that got into trouble or are lying in wait at chokepoints. This makes for a very dynamic and variable battlefield where the players create the spawnpoints and setups.

I was thinking that a Sub can see some of the world around him, but not much. Most will be done on the radar, where targets are shown with a relative height to your Sub. You can have submarine hunters with sonar and the capabilities to see farther underwater to better intercept and attack submarines. You can have stealth subs that literally go stealth to avoid the Submarine hunters, and you have attack submarines that are there to hunt down ships on the surface, which they attack after surfacing.

Nah, apparently torpedoes and bombing finished it off.

As far as I see it, the warpgate locking is a bit confusing, I don't know what unlocks what, but I figure that if naval warfare is added. Instead of minor warp gates like for example the 2 Southern ones in Indar. We can get the factions the continents they own in the lore. Meaning TR=Indar NC=Amerish and Vanu=Esamir, while letting Hossin be the middle ground again.

What we can have instead is sort of a spawn zone and dock for these minor warpgates. So if the enemy gets their navy in, brings troops ashore and captures on, it links it to the fatherland or motherland, w/e you prefer, and they can spawn in that gate.

That way, we give people a reason to fight on water outside of bombarding, and it makes it a HUGELY important part of the game. This also will let us have some D-Day scenarios.

Making carriers the spawners will also be very important, because you create a demand for them, and sinking them becomes rewarding. This will also make the job of Battleships in defending territory important. While the enemy Cruisers, Destroys and others escort and defend the Carriers in order to succeed.

However the system is implemented one thing is absolutely important, the ships have to be powerful, all of them. They have to have incredible hp and armor, tens of thousands of hp to make repairing very slow, for big ships, and very heavy armor to take damage for a very long time.

I don't know if a Sub can have it's periscope out deep underwater, but it definitely can at periscope depth. Modern subs probably use lasers and sound to know what's around it.

Also the problem with a Stealth sub is well...THEY'RE ALL STEALTHY. They all are dead silent, and brutal to find, the captain really has to **** up to get caught. Wanna know exactly how stealthy? An English and French sub collided, one was right above the other and smashed its tower, nothing too bad, but the tower was bent.

So that's an idea of how stealthy they are, 2 modern subs, ramming into each other unintentionally, and they never knew who hit them until they surfaced.

So Submarines hunting other Subs, won't work under water. The problem is they are superb machines of stealth. It's incredible really, submarine engineers are geniuses.

At low depth...it's possible, with guided torpedoes.

I think there's 2 kinds of Submarines, ones that go and take out ships, and ones built for pure infiltration, and long term stays.

The problem is both don't need to refuel for 20 years, both have an unlimited supply of air, and both have A LOT of food. So...****..

I have no idea how we can make subs built up for different things.

I mean, I suppose you can give them mobile spawning, so maxing out stealth upgrades and such to stay under water and release troops can work. Or to go through enemy lines to surface and drop off troops. I think we had a sub successfully release a navy seal team while under water. So that's one thing we can do.

The bottom is very weak, top, very weak. Sides, unbreakable, they can take hours of beatings to the side without a dent.

Front, and back are weak I think, at least old ships had a weak front and back.

Warpgate locking seems still a bit unfinished. From what I understand each continent will have a homegate and 2 'normal' gates which than can be captured. If you capture a warpgate you get a link to a battle-island that is linked to another warpgate on another continent. This way you can capture a warpgate on one continent, fight your way through the battle island and capture a warpgate on another continent to gain a foothold and start fighting there.
There are a few blank spots, for instance the Hossin Warpgate is connected to two Warpgates on one continent. What if both of those warpgates are in a different factions hands? (one TR one VS), who gets the Hossin Warpgate then?
That aside, my idea was to replace the battle island with the sea battles. Passage could be gained either by attacking and destroying the main carrier. An alternative would be to make use of the coming feature where you can take vehicles from one warpgate to another area.
Basicly, you spawn all boats at the warpgate, sail to a certain part of the sea and then you load up the island-battle 'continent'. In the island battle continent you can move to the other side and warp yourself to the enemy continent, there you can start a beach assault, climb up to the warpgate and capture it. The island battle is there to allow people different paths to the warpgate.

I pitched the idea of different submarines out of a game-perspective. I understand that submarines are all stealthy, but that's a hard sell in a video game I think. 'here's some ships, go do battle, just know there's a completely undetectable ship that might appear out of nowhere and blow you to bits'.
Making them detectable at varying degree's, both by other subs as well as ships on the surface, would create a more complex and entertaining game I think. Sub hunters above and below the surface have ways of finding and attacking submarines (depth charges, special torpedo's), while other subs can be specialised. An MBT sub to seek and destroy ships, a Sunderer Sub that can deploy somewhere and allow infantry to spawn and infiltrate something somewhere. One-man subs that can be deployed from other ships for special operations. Perhaps a Rocket-sub that carries multiple large rockets, the rockets follow an arc to the point the sub looks at, this allows it to perform shore-bombardments or hit ships from the top. You can create a lot of variation to add more flavor to the game, even though it's not all realistic.
Just think, with all the laser, heat and electronicly guided missiles capable of tracking and destroying aircraft or tanks miles away, how can a world such as Planetside still rely on seemingly WW2 style combat (which is much more fun than watching a screen of blibs)

yours sincerely,
Demigan.